Those astronauts are going to die, aren't they?
Shielding did its job, okay?
Do you know what ablative shield is?
>>16938648Ablative armor isn't supposed to boil from the inside.
>>16938602>Artemis II’m not sure you’re aware of this, but tomorrow’s launch is in fact Artemis II, not I. Or do you think NASA engineers don’t go back to the drawing board whenever something needs to be improved on?
>>16938655well, you're not going to believe this but>NASA announced it would proceed with Artemis II using the existing heat shield. NASA has stated that design changes addressing AVCOAT permeability are planned for the heat shield intended for Artemis III
>>16938655The Artemis 1 heat shield broke like that because it wasn't porous enough and fluid inside it boiled instead of escaping.The Artemis 2 design is *less* porous!
>>16938602well the spacecraft survived did it not?
>>16938602
How come no one has died in a Soyuz reentry capsule in 55 years (since 1971) but burgers can't do it properly in 2026?
>As of early 2026, NASA has cleared the heat shield design for the Artemis II mission, concluding that the remaining margin of safety is sufficient for a crewed flight.No.
>>16938772Yeah, they know what they're do-ACK
>>16938602Don't quench charcoal and you eill be fine
I hope not.
>>16938792Columbia wasn't a thermal protection failure, it was mechanical damage caused by debris impact on launch
>>16938759It's fine! But we will change it for Fartemis III.
>>16938602>watching nasa fake another landing
>>16938602Just put the rockets on the orbit, wagie.
>>16938769Reentry from the moon is 4x more difficult than Low Earth Orbit where Soyuz returns from. Different problem. But unironically NASA used this new shitty heat shield instead of the Apollo design due to environmental concerns.
I asked grok why this jpl engineer says that reentry is a "future goal" if it already happened, and it said that it's not impossible it's just hecking difficult and the payload fraction is low.
then the clanker told me that reentry at Uranus is more difficult than at Jupiter because of different chemistry (which is bull, they are both made of hydrogen and helium) and that the ballistic trajectory is different so that's why Uranus/Neptune is undoable but Jupiter is (bull)
>>16942353The non uniform degradation, with heavily localized weak points, is a sign of problems in the manufacturing process.
>>16943056>>16943064Did you make these? Or where can I find more
>>16938792>>16938977Would still be around if they never stopped painting the external tank.
>>16943065Phenolic resins are corrosive to stainless steel. Whether or not this matters, I don't know.
>>16943056>is space exploration yet another statist trick?what's the point of complaining about nation states, when there are several multibillionaires who would immediately gain power similar to that of a state without all the checks and balances if the united states stopped existing as a nation state?elon would have insane leverage over any country currently at war through starlink, which has already been demonstrated in ukraine and reigned in by the us government.not to mention the fact that he controls the biggest space launch platform at the moment, giving him a monopoly on most things bigger than a cubesat, i.e. spy satellites and possibly nukes if left unchecked.and that's just elon. think about what palantir or amazon would turn into.get rid of the flawed democracy and you end up living as a serf for a dozen absolutist rulers who currently at least have to pull strings with the presidency rather than just acting on their own without interference from anyone.
